奇怪, 有d人忽然写既野忽然有道理佐...

奇怪有些人还不知道，香港人不要CY在一次的好心做坏事。

不过CY喜欢出烂头蟀，死的也是烂头蟀。

 

I am doubtful why Dr. Tong has this kind of view.....

八万五应该是问题所在,

1. 当时以香港为主要居住地人口多少?

2. 当时97移民人数多少?

3. 当时返国内工作人口多少?

4. 当时社会人口年龄分布如何?

相信这些数据不会比今天的数据好! 今天香港尚可未必能够有承担八万五这个数量, 何况当年?  当年政府好大喜功, 议员无脑附和, 当然太多人炒卖也是原因.

(政府手持炒卖数量来作数据以计算兴建数量, 实是不智!)

前日睇电视，见倒 CY 落区，向班深水埗街坊话政府系赤柱起公屋及居屋系「德政」，住系嗰度嘅居民都无反对，咁样 Mark 大眼讲大话都得，真系唔揾你做特首都唔得！

我楼下之前有个女看更，就真系住赤柱马坑邨，她说每日返工放工都要用成个几两个钟搭巴士，交通费讲紧系每日几拾元，而附近因为只得两叁间学校，所以细路要出湾仔或东区读书！

 

拒想问正苦系拨块地起公屋马坑邨，及两个居屋龙欣苑与龙德苑之前，有无想吓下列简单问题：-

赤柱系咪只得单綫双程行车？

有无可能整集体运输？

而交通费咁贵，穷人点捱？

附近学校又贵又唔多间，啲细路去边度返学？

医院又远在东区或薄扶林，有急病点死？

连拒都唔知正苦同啲议员系唔系用XX思想嘅！

但另一方面，嗰度明明系超靓豪宅地段，随时起倒上百间豪宅！每间起码几千万计，地价以数拾亿计，够在西铁沿綫起数千个公屋单位！

而嗰啲想系左近楼换楼嘅富豪好想话俾你 CY 知，真系俾你「吹胀」！

好一个好心做坏事.

 

希特拉至今在某些人眼中仍是好心做坏事.

 

做了坏事就是坏事, 还分好心做和坏心做的

不怕，CY有烂头蟀，有问题也是他的烂头蟀问题。他永远不会错的。

系 97 年之前，炒几个单位嘅炒家，当然系死伤枕藉，但亦都系死有余辜喎！

但嗰啲无想过靠政府帮，只系得一层楼自住嘅小业主又点计先，当时失业率大升，就算保得著份工都面对减薪、加辛、无 OT 、无秘捞嘅苦况，唔少人因此供唔掂层楼，被迫同层楼  Say Good-bye！就咁无晒半生积蓄，咁拒哋又系唔系抵死呢？

博士说得非常正确,终於还八万五一个公道!!!

一个好心做坏事政策。

"不少人以八万五政策为楼市下跌七成元凶，但是有没有人考虑楼市下跌七成元凶其实是他们自己，元凶的名字是「不量力而为」。"

看博士几十篇文章，这篇算系最公道的文章，值得一赞！

只狼登基后,

大把私人飞机游艇等佢坐!!

但只老狼机智过人,

ICAC都入佢吾到!!

HK PEOPLE IS DYING!!

"大量投资物业，当市况逆转，该批人士走避不及，变成负资产者，这可以说他们的行为不当，又关八万五什么事。"

说得正确不过！这是事实！O了这类赖三赖四的人真的地不要得！

无论支持八万五的人赖三赖四

 

还是改变不了一个博士结论

 

一个好心做坏事政策。

CY都改为三万五啦, 重撑

如果你说97年亚洲金融风暴楼价大跌七成是八万五政策,o甘点解当时商铺和写字楼系97年亚洲金融风暴后一样跌镬金?商铺和写字楼是没有八万五政策的!!!好明显当时跌市的元凶是过度借贷和超高息!!!如果明天银行将P加到12厘,楼市一样会下跌七成,请不要赖三赖四

以九七年的环境即使没有八万五政策,楼价一样大跌七成,原因是乱借和息口过高,当时银行关水喉关得很快

不表态还可以，有必要如此擦鞋吗？

我觉得 "真相 兄" 的论述也很值得大家思考，当年泡沫爆破后，也有很多人支持继续，虽然政府已暂停了政策而没有公布，这是因为若公布停止了政策，又会有另一班人(特别系班为反而反的饭民，甚至经济学家，自由党)大力反对。

http://property.hk.msn.com/article_content.php?author=PHK_TML2&com=&id=17347

O了当年梗系输了很多钱，应该系博士所讲当年「不量力而为」和行为不当的人了。

原来是忽然网友.

 

长期网友就知我底啦

 

唔好估估吓,请不要赖三赖四

Q了当年梗系沽空楼市赚了很多钱，应该系博士所讲当年行为不当的人了。

9798年买的楼如今好多已返回家乡，不用蚀本！特别中产楼宇！
买楼难守楼更难！如果当年买的楼可守到今日，应该唔会点蚀，所以要睇自己的供楼能力！
政治的动荡无疑影响当时市民的意向，但升跌谁人知？
只是0304年又给予重生机会，只看自己眼光！长期来说，楼宇升值潜力大过股票指数！只在你的一念之间！
无论谁当特首，买楼都系靠自己!

香港不是一个计划经济地区行经济策略是有一定风险。当时地政与房屋都是跟英国策略。更把这个策略送去行政局。而且香港这个买办政治。没有防经济风暴。所以自不量力的人所面对问题。现在所有房屋供应都给曾集团拖到公屋要等七年的日子快到。这个八万五根本没有罪过。

To Host
Very well said..........
Many people at the time does not believe the HK government have the capacities nor the labor nor the land supply to build 85,000. It was very well analyzed by most if not all of the property expert that the government at the time does not have the abovementioned abilities.
The culprit of the 70% is as Dr. Tong stated. ( our own greed) .  I recalled I attended an seminar 1-2 years ago on HK property , the speaker was pointing out that the property affordability  index surpassed 100 in and around 1997 (i.e  HK people was spending more then 100% of  their income on property) . Hence the bubble would burst naturally when the Asian Financial crisis acted as an 'pin' .
Good article Dr.Tong!

typo
The culprit of the 70% fall in property prices*

When I looked at the Centaline property index, the major fall in prices was from 1997 to 1999, the supply of those '85,000' werent even available yet at the time.
The sharp fall was due to over leveraging by HK people in property, resulted in panic selling in all type of properties

And why should property owners expect an 20%-30% YoY compounded rise in property prices to be an never ever ending story?
I am a stakeholder myself, but I dont think an 20%-30% compounding rise in prices should be the norm nor it is healthy to our society as a whole.

a lot of people forgot one very "fatal" measure inside the 85,000 policy.

that is -- to sell public housing  卖公屋 !

this act will change the supply abruptly. building 85,000 needs time, but this 卖公屋 policy will pump up the supply in one night.

do u think who suggested this idea ?

 

 

TO HK people
If I recalled correctly. '卖公屋' werent that popular at the time, and people werent flocking to buy those 公屋 flats, plus they were selling those at dirt cheap price and those were a completely different market segment Vs the private sector

To HK people
You seem to be very uncomfortable when CY come into power, if that is the case. You're always free to sell your property or properties. It's a free market!

I am sorry, After searching  '卖公屋' policy from the net, I admitted that it was quite popular, but those were completely different market segment from the private segment.

Definitely, '卖公屋' policy could not affect private property market. It might not be a bad policy as govt. would no longer subsidize the rent and rates, management and maintenance in future.

true that they belong to different market segment, but this policy did take away some buying forces from the low end market, not sure how big the impact is.

if you ever play the 曡高高游戏，this policy is like taking the bottom pieces away.

 

 

well, may be I am proposing another version of Butterfly Effect.

don't take it so seriously :-p

 

虽然八万五不是楼价大跌的唯一原因,但它明显是其中一个主要因素。这个政策使当时的地产发展商明白到要保持盈利,就一定要货如轮转,由於他们不惜货拚命推盘,再加上用家根本无法吸纳大量盘源,致使楼价一泄如注,加剧调整。没有八万五,九七年的楼价都是要下调的;有了八万五,楼价跌得更厉害,这是不争的事实。周先生不要因CY上场而改变立场!

97楼市泡沫爆破 + 高利息 + 亚洲金融风暴 + 2000年科网股泡沫爆破 + 2003SARS ，跌7成算少了。如果97泡沫延续多一年，跌幅更大。

日本楼市泡沫爆破，也没有什么8万5，跌8成多。

为自己投资失误找藉口，难道楼市一定要升到你预期的目标，按你预期的轨迹升跌，在跌之前通知你走货吗？自己炒大了，走避不及，讲到全世界人都欠你咁样，简直无赖。


博士讲得冇错：
"楼市下跌七成元凶其实是他们自己，元凶的名字是「不量力而为」。"
"大量投资物业，当市况逆转，该批人士走避不及，变成负资产者，这可以说他们的行为不当，又关八万五什么事。"


网友也讲得冇错：

16. 楼中人2012-04-02 16:05:24

如果你说97年亚洲金融风暴楼价大跌七成是八万五政策,o甘点解当时商铺和写字楼系97年亚洲金融风暴后一样跌镬金?商铺和写字楼是没有八万五政策的!!!好明显当时跌市的元凶是过度借贷和超高息!!!如果明天银行将P加到12厘,楼市一样会下跌七成,请不要赖三赖四

这类输了钱的赖三赖四的人真的不要得！


李永达也没说错：
http://property.hk.msn.com/article_content.php?author=PHK_TML2&com=&id=17347
人们责难「八万五」导致楼市大跌，只不过是一些人「在逆境中寻找原因泄愤」而已。

赌仔输钱，一定有野赖！

应该系博士成篇文的主旨了！俾个Like你！

40. 一句讲晒2012-04-03 10:22:05 赌仔输钱，一定有野赖！

"97楼市泡沫爆破 + 高利息 + 亚洲金融风暴 + 2000年科网股泡沫爆破 + 2003SARS ，跌7成算少了"

 

为什么要加上一个8万5呢? 当时行政会议成员是否不知高利息+亚洲金融风暴? 抑或明知而一意孤行, 不理后果???

To37
You also agreed that that the major part of the fall was due to Asian financial crisis + over leveraging. So why blamed the 6-7 yrs fall in prices solely on 85,000?
Why do the rest of the South East Asian countries recovered faster than us?  Well....... probably they are not as overly leveraged as us, and they have other industries to support their their economy.

40楼说得很对，我也有一些同事97的时候全副身家夹钱再借尽买了几个单位，结果输到PK，能怪谁！

40. 一句讲晒2012-04-03 10:22:05

赌仔输钱，一定有野赖！

实在太精景，赌仔姓赖，我都要俾一个赞你！

白痴理论！

上善兄可否告知这个落成量图表在哪里找的? 是否地政署?

 

 

85,000 Policy was good policy, ordinary citizens could buy their flats at the bottom prices !

Like many companies went bankrupt, many professionals and middle-class people forgot the risk of cash flows during investing in real estates. Really, we had heard one doctor or dentist who hold over 7 properties at that time ! What they said was Buy More Get More !

Next poor policy, it should be minimum wage. Think about the wage payments are NOT based on education, experience, useful skills, performances and merits, and business environment, their incomes only reply on Laws. How's about the incentives for this working class ? Who takes care of the middle-class people ?

For rough references, we had at least 2 staff ( one driver & one ticketing staff ) for driving a public bus in the old days, nowadays, we only have one driver for all activities for one bus. Even, we have heard unmanned trains for many decades !

Inside a Bank, we had experiences in dealing transactions with a number of tellers at counters or some ATMs in the old days. Now, we have Internet Banking to complete all the transactions. Bank cheques will be no longer used in the near future. 

As Money has been becoming a Digital Number, many Fast Food Chains may design an on screen menu with icons /pictures for customers to select & pay through touching the screens, many low skill people will lose their jobs by introducing new technology. Minimum wages may not be helpful to them.

Further, the society is heading to Electronic Operations and / or Paperless Environment, we CANNOT expect that we need typists, clerks, filing workers, more post officiers for delivery of mails, policemen in the future world.   

Minimum wage policy is good for Lawmakers ! Believe or Not. Time can tell you the truth !

80后银行兄：

图表是在Google上搜寻的，出自一份房地产研究报告。具体出处，忘记了，不好意思！

基本的经济理论，当供应大过需求时，价格自然会向下跌！

赌仔输钱，一定有野赖！

小弟近日与几位国内投资者交流, 发现他们对香港楼市看法转趋谨慎. 他们并不像传媒平时报导那样想也不想就胡乱出高价买楼, 绝对是看升值潜力! 国内楼价在连番打压之下, 一线城市普遍比高位回落了10%, 而他们亦预期还有至少再跌10%才有望见底.

 

最值得参考的, 是他们在国内习惯了政策市, 政策扶助时随便买都能赚; 但政策要打压时, 那么最利害也只能输少当羸. 建议还是顺势而行. CY即使不每年推8万5那么多, 只要供应在上升周期, 需求只会萎缩得更快.

吾见识浅薄， 没有真知灼见， 不过我想说数段话。 回归前香港地产炒风炽热是不争的事实。 犹记得当时还在求学时期的我在电视上看见一幕幕不少人通宵排队买楼用以炒作，以及有黑手党帮手排队的报导。 根据立法会及财经事务及库务局网上资料，"差饷物业估价署计算出按揭还款与入息比例 (以私人住户入息中位数的住户，购买实用面积为45平方米的私人住宅单位，以平均按揭利率进行七成按揭和二十年偿还贷款等假设计算)， 於1996年的按年平均按揭还款与入息比例为67%，而1997年为87% "， "於1997年12月，市场上给予良好客户的新造按揭贷款的利率大致为10.5厘，当中包括最优惠利率9.5厘及贷款利率差价1厘，即P+1厘"。 在这样过度借贷及亚洲金融风暴打击引发的高息背景下，相信当时即使没有八万五政策，香港的房地产市场也会倒下，只不过下跌的幅度可能是没有七成这么大。 快将上任凡特首的梁振英先生曾指出，"当年兴建85000个公营及私营房屋目标， 在回归前 ， 即97年1月发表的长远房屋政策谘询文件中 ， 已经提出"。而当时亚洲金融风暴还没有来临， 因此我相信当年的董建华先生是一位有良心的特首， 而当时的八万五政策是回应社会诉求 。

Acutally not just 1997 have quenes for buying properties. even 2003 also have, but the quenes were created by the actors empolyed by land developers !

I remembered when I bought the Metro-Harbour view when it first launches, only 2700/ft in 2001. I also need to stayed overnight (Hang kei like to sell them in mid-night), the developer is Hang Kei. And they empolyed a lot of actors to quene up in order to create the same atomosphere as 97. They even empolyed Fei-Fei to sing songs, and give free Mcdonald's food to not just buyers, but other citizens (just want to create more people, some come here just for free lunch!)

 Next year, the Honghom, another one developed by Cheong Kong (have a bridge connected to Honghom railway station) also have some shows like this around 2002-2003. I remembered the flat is very cheap around 2 millions (of course a lot of people thought very expensive at that time of year). At that time, land developers land to keep you stay at mid-night, may use fatique to make you feel that the building is cheap to buy, and force you to entered into the market.

Your brain may not be so clear at night, and easily brain wash,

5穷6绝7仆街，股楼齐崩，煤碳股热卖！

在我看来，这不是好心做坏事的政策，而是一个有心做好事的政府在与地产和资本大鳄博弈的过程中输掉的一场战斗。这场战斗政府本是可以赢的，但输在天时（亚洲金融风暴）、输在心不够狠（董生的政治手腕不够）、输在决心不够坚决（事实上是没人可以撼动政府的）、输在没有掌控舆论宣传（负资产是部分人投机所造成，他们本应该自取其咎）。如果董生当时坚决推行，房地产业逐步从香港的支柱产业地位退却，香港的经济形态得以扭转，对香港未来百年、千年发展决定是好事。